Testimony

“Until you understand and quantify these costs, you cannot claim that fracking Illinois will provide net economic benefits, nor can you claim that the current set of proposed regulations—which were promulgated behind closed doors without the involvement of Illinois’ public health community—are sufficiently protective. Indeed, with this same argument we chose in New York to reject our proposed draft regulations, which were far stricter than yours.” From Steingraber’s testimony for the Illinois House Executive Committee Hearings on Proposed Regulatory Bill for Fracking, SB 1715.

“I’m here to speak today as a founding member of Concerned Health Professionals of New York. This is a group of scientists, physicians, and nurses that came together last fall, in a spirit of shared alarm, when we learned that the DEC’s study of the health effects of fracking—which we had long asked for—was not going to be conducted using any normative protocols nor in an open manner, which is also normative for public health inquiries.” Read the testimony

“I thought the California report I helped prepare was monumental until I read the revised draft supplemental environmental impact statement for hydraulic fracturing in New York—the sGEIS—which is three times as long and weighs 15 pounds. I wish I could say that the sGEIS is three times as thorough. It is not.” Read the transcript

Dr. Steingraber provides testimony at a New York State Public Hearing of the Senate Standing Committee on Energy Conservation, sponsored by Senators Mark Grisanti and Patrick Gallivan to examine waste water produced by hydraulic fracturing. Watch the testimony

“The SGEIS Emperor has no clothes.” Dr. Steingraber refers to the state’s draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement in her testimony at a New York State Department of Environmental Conservation hearing in Binghamton, NY. Watch the testimony